I know but if even PMT is not going to scrap it have you even considered it is a 'good' benefit?

The only thing the Libs are going to reverse is the DO's. And even then most of the re-opening's will be satellite offices or more VAC employees at Service Canada Offices. I like this and have said so.

My point is it's time to let the past go and move forward because the longer veterans continue to bash at "What was then" is giving the Liberals an excuse to avoid "This is now".

And to clarify my Syrian refugee statements....if PMT can move this fast on the refugee file then whats the excuse that they can't move this fast on the veteran file. Afterall aren't Canadian Veterans somewhat similar to refugees? Don't we deserve the same swift attention on our file? Points that should be expressed to our new Minister. I don't want to see vet issues turn into 'white noise' with the current government.

well bigrex I recall that and you were not the only one . these new benefits looked week from the get go . they started to look a little better with some explanation and then back to week again after the legislation came out .

And teen, I didn't wait for your post. I have been very critical of the RISB, and other new benefits, since the details were announced. These numbers just do not jive with everything that I have seen and heard in regards to the RISB.

This isn't a budget though. This is a supposedly independent body, who is supposed to provide accurate numbers, or as close as possible, of government programs. The PBO shouldn't be needing to give estimates. They should have access to all the information from VAC, and know the actual number of Veterans that are getting the RISB, or will be getting it, within the next ten years, because they are currently getting EELB. Then looking at what those people will be getting, and what deductions are made. Sure the numbers could get larger, but I doubt that there will be enough Veterans older than 55 that will start getting EELB, to throw the numbers off that much.

I agree with Navrat, that the RISB needs to be repealed, and simply extend EELB and SISIP for life, as per the recommendations from those who studied the NVC.

That's even better $600 million over 10 years for vets.The Libs said they are not goingto scrap any of the new benefits. Can't remember which one but I believe PMT said he is going to increase one. I believe he was quoted that they were all good benefits.Bean counters always count for inflation. Usually it's the average of the yearly cost of living.All I hope is that the money will be there for us as I saw last night the cost for the 25,000 refugees over the same 10 year period is going to be $1.2 billion.

I would think over-estimating a budget is a good thing and a proper thing. I wouldn't want someone to tell me the promises I made or cheques I wrote.....I couldn't afford. Better to err on the side of caution??

But again.......who holds the bean counters accountable? Every government I am aware of has always said the previous governments budget is/was wrong......who is to really know?

Additionally: by over-inflating an estimate only leaves a little wiggle room should things get tight or to cover up a bigger boo boo and get them out of a mess the public never hears about.

Risb needs to be flushed! It's a BS benefit. I am sure once the Trudeau team takes a look at all the Conservative mistakes regarding the Veterans file they will scrap it and extend sisip ltd, EELB for life.

I just do not see how the RISB will cost $112 million, even over ten years. There would have to be several hundred Veterans, over age 65, getting an average 0f $1500/mo, to spend that much money. But in order to get that much from the RISB monthly, they would need to be released without a CF pension, making at least $50000 from the ELB, approved for PIA/PIAS, and receive less than $1000/month from CPP and OAS combined. Seeing as there are only around 2000 people even getting EELB, and the vast majority are nowhere near retirement age, I'm thinking that the numbers might be over inflated.

OTTAWA -- Canada's budget watchdog says a series of improvements to benefits for veterans, introduced in the waning days of the Harper government, will likely cost the federal treasury $231.6 million over the next decade.The parliamentary budget office has crunched the numbers on the new retirement income security benefit for veterans over 65 and the higher earnings loss benefit for part-time reservists.The Conservative government introduced four major changes last spring aimed at the most seriously wounded, hoping to rebuild bridges with veterans upset about gaps in the system -- one the new Liberal government has vowed to improve further.

The retirement benefit is intended for severely and moderately disabled ex-soldiers who have not been in uniform long enough to qualify for a military pension. That benefit will cost $112 million over 10 years, the PBO says.The cost of improved earnings loss benefits for part-time reservists is estimated at $118 million.The PBO says it was not able to calculate the cost improvements to the permanent impairment allowance, nor the family caregiver benefit, which grants up to $7,238 to the families of wounded veterans.In its report, the budget office says the improvements will push the overall cost of providing benefits to the country's ex-soldiers to $3.3 billion over the next 10 years.The report also takes a stab at estimating precisely how much the Afghan war will cost the veterans system -- in both physical and mental health payments -- between now and 2025.The budget office pegs that number at $157 million."These findings draw attention to the important fact that the costs of war extend beyond the Forces' withdrawal from theatre, and beyond the boundaries of (the Department of National Defence) budget," said the report."Despite Canada's withdrawal from Afghanistan five years ago, (Veterans Affairs Canada's) program expenses have continued to increase because of the participation of CAF members and veterans in the Afghanistan combat mission."

Researchers doing the study discovered that Veterans Affairs does not conduct analytic or actuarial projections on individual missions -- or military campaigns. It simply tracks the benefits afterwardsThe budget office says it's imperative that the department crunch the numbers ahead of time."The intent of this analysis is to ensure that these costs come as no surprise to parliamentarians, and to inform future debates pertaining to the role of the Canadian Armed Forces," the report said.Using the size of the Afghanistan deployment in 2007 as a research model, the budget office says future governments could expect to pay as much as $145 million in veterans benefits costs over a 10-year period following a similar conflict.